s v.'j.r h Class L^ji. . la3 4 THE lANDMRK OF FREEDOM. SPEECH OF . ., ' HON. CHARLES SUMNER AGAINST THE EEPEAL ..^, OF THE MISSOURI PROHIBITION OF SLAVEB.Y NORTH OF 36° 30'. m THE SENATE, FEBRUARY 21, 1854. J C^l " Curbed be kc that removeth his neighbor', Landmarh. And all the people shall say, Amkn." Dkut., ch. xivii, v. 27. The Senate having under consideration the bill to establiMh Territorial Govern- ments in Nebraska and Kansas — Mr. SUMNER said: Mr. President: I approach this discus- sion with awe. The mighty question, L with untold isf.^ues, which it involves, op- presses me. Like a portentous cloud, surcharged with irresistible storm and ruin, it seems to fill the whole heavens, making me painfully conscious how une- qual I am to the occasion — how unequal, also, is all that I can say, to all that I feel. In delivering my sentiments here to- day, I shall speak frnnkly — according to my convictions, without concealment or reserve. But if anything fell from the Senator from Illinois, [Mr. Douglas,] in opening this discussion, which might seem to challenge a personal contest, I desire to say that I shall not enter upon It. Let not a word or a tone pass my lips, to direct attention, for a moment, from the transcendent theme, by the side of which Senators and Presidents are but dwarfs. I would not forget those amenities which be ong to this place, and are so well cal- culated to temper the antagonism of de- bate ; nor can I cease to remember and to feel, that, amidst all diversities of opinion, we are the representatives of thirty-one sister republics, knit together by iridisso- luble tie, and constituting that Plural Unit, which we all embrace bv the endearing name of country. The question presented for your con- sideration is not surpassed in grandeur by any which has occurred in our national history since the Declaration of Independ- ence. In every aspect it assumes gil , declare, that the States formed out of this which, without exairireration, or even im aorination, may be likened to the tree of liff Iliprh t'lninent, Jiloomintj auibrusial fruit Of vegetaljlu gold. It is with regard to this territory, that you are now called to exercise the grandest function of the lawgiver, by establishing those rules of polity which will determine its future character. As the twig is bent the tree inclines; and the influences im- pressed upon the early days of an em- pire, like those upon a child, are of incon- ceivable importance to its future weal or woe. The bill now before us, proposes to organize and equip two new territorial es- tablishments, with governors, secretaries, IcLHslative councils, legislators, judges. territory should be admitted into the Union, " with or without slavery," and did not directly assume to touch this Prohi- bition. For some reason this was not sat- isfactory, and then it was precipitately proposed to declare, that the prohibition in the JNIissouri act " was superseded by the principles of the legislation of 1850, commonly called the Compromise Meas- ures, and is hereby declared inoperative." But this would not do ; and it is now proposed to declare, that the Prohibition, "being inconsistent with the principles of non-intervention, by Congress, with sla- very in tlie States and Territories, as recog- nised by the legislation of 1850, commonly called the Compromise Measures, is here- by declared inoperative and void." All this is to be done on pretences marshals, and the whole machinery of foj,„j^.ji ^po,, tj.e slavery enacimeiits of civil society. Such a measure, at any time, would deserve the most careful attention. But, at the present moment, it justly ex cites a peculiar interest, from the effort jnade — on pretences unsustained by facts— in violation of solemn covenant, and of the early principles of our fathers — to open thisimmense region to slavery. According to existing law, this territory is now guarded against slavery by a posi- tive prohibition, embodied in the act of Congress, approved JMarch 6th, 1820, pre- paratory to the admission of Missouri into the Union, as a sister State, and in the fallowing explicit words : " Sec. 8. Be it further enacted, That in all that territory ceded by France to the United Slalex^ under the name of Louisiana, which lies north 36° 30' of north latitude, not included within the limits of the State contemplated hv tliis act, slavkuy and INVOLUNTAKV SKRViTiiDK, otlicrwisc tliau HS the punishment of crimes, suAi.L, iiK, ANU is jikukuy, FOilKVKR I'llOIlIBITED." It is now proposed to set aside this pro- hibition ; but there seems to be a singular 1850, thus seeking, with mingled audacity and cunning, " by indirection to find di- rection out." Now. sir, I am not here to speak in behalf of those measures, or to lean in any way upon their support. Re- lating to different subject-matters, contain- ed in different acts, which prevailed suc- cessively, at different times, and by differ- ent votes — some persons voting for one measure, and some voting for another, and very few voting for all — they cannot be rewarded as a unit, embodying conditions of compact, or compromise, if you jjlease, adopted equally by all parties, and there- fore obligatory on all parties. But since this broken series of measures has been adduced as an apology for the proposition now before us, I desire to say, that, such as they are, they cannot, by any effort of inter])retation, by any distorting wand of power, by any perverse alchemy, be trans- muted into a repeal of that original Prohi- bition of Silvery. On this head there are several points to indecision as to the way in which the deed which I would merely call attention, ana shall be done. From the time of its first introduction, in the report of the Com- mittee on Territories, the proposition has assumed different shapes; and it promises to assume as many as ProtfMis ; now, one thimr in Ibrm, and now, another; now, like a river, and then like llame : but, in every form and shape, identical in substance ; with but one end and aim — its be-all and then pass on. First : The slavery enact- ments of 1850 did not j^retcnd, in terms, to touch, much less to change, the condi- tion of the Louisiana Territory, which was already fixed by C(jngressional enactment, but simply acted upon "newly-acquired Territories," the condition of which was not already fixed by Congressional enact- ment. The two transactions related to !i^'i VJ^''-^. r''?F dUN 6 1917 SPEECH OF CHARLES SUMNER. 8 different subject-matters. Secondly: The | against the deed," I arraign it: First, \n enactments do not directly touch the sub- - _ . ^ o ject of slavery, during the Territorial ex- istence of Utah and New Mexico ; but they provide prospectively, that, when ad- mitted as States, they shall be received " with or without slavery." Here certainly can be no overthrow of an act of Congress which directly concerns a Territory during its Territorial existence. Thirdly : Dur- ing all the discussion of these measures in Congress, and afterwards before the people, and through the public press, at the North and the South alike, no person was heard to intimate that the Prohibition of Slavery in the Missouri act was in any way disturbed. An&, fourthly : The acts themselves contain a formal provision, that " nothing herein contained shall be construed to impair or qualify anything" in a certain article of the resolutions an- nexing Texas, wherein it is expressly de- clared, that in territory north of the Mis- souri Compromise line, " slavery, or invol- untary servitude, except for crime, shall be prohibited." But I do not dwell on these things. These pretences have been already amply refuted by able Senators who have prece- ded me. It is clear, beyond contradiction, that the Prohibition of Slavery in this Terri- tory has not been superseded or in any way contravened by the Slavery Acts of 1850. The proposition before you is, therefore, original in its character, without sanction from any former legislation, and it must, accordingly, be judged by its merits, as an original proposition. Here, sir, let it be remembered, that the friends of Freedom are not open to any charge of aggression. They are now stand- ing on the defensive, guarding the early entrenchments thrown up by our fathers. No proposition to abolish slavery any- where is now before you ; but, on the con- trary, a proposition to abolish Freedom. The term Abolitionist, which is so often applied in reproach, justly belongs, on this occasion, to him who would overthrow this well-established landmark. He is, indeed, no Abolitioni.^t of Slavery ; let him be called, sir, an Abolitionist of Free- dom. For myself, whether with many or few, my place is taken. Even if alone, my feeble arm should not be wanting as a bar against this outrage. On two distinct grounds, " both strong the name of Public Faith, as an infraclion of solemn obligations, assumed beyond re- call by the South, on the admission of Mis- souri into the Union as a slave State : Secondly, I arraign it, in the name of Free- dom, as an unjustifiable departure from the original anti-slavery policy of our fathers. These two heads I propose to consider in their order, glancing under the latter at the objections to the Prohibition of Slavery in the Territories. And here, sir, before I approach the ar^ gument, indulge me with a few preliminary words on the character of this proposition. Slavery is the forcible subjection of one human being, in person, labor, and prop- erty, to the will of another. In this simple statement is involved its whole injustice. There is no offence against religion, against morals, against humanity, which may not, in the license of this institution, stalk " unwhipt of justice." For the husband and wife there is no marriage; for the mother there is no assurance that her infant child will not be ravished from her breast; for all who bear the name of Slave, there is noth- ing that they can call their own. Without a father, without a mother, almost without a God, the slave has nothing but a master. It would be contrary to that Rule of Right, which is ordained by God, ifsuch a system, though mitigated often by a patriarchal kindness, and by a plausible physical comfort, could be otherwise than perni- cious in its influences. It is confessed, that the master suffers not less than the slave. And this is not all. The whole social fabric is disorganized; labor loses its dignity ; in- dustry sickens; education finds no schools, and all the land of slavery is impoverished. And now, sir, when the conscience Oi mankind is at last aroused to these things ; when, throughout the civilized world, a slave-dealer is a by-word and a reproach, we, as a. nation, are about to open a new market to the traffickers in flesh, that haunt the shambles of the South. Such an act, at this time, is removed from all reach of that palliation often vouchsafed to t^la- very. This wrong, we are speciously told, by those who seek to defend it, is not our original sin. It was entailed upon us, so we are instructed, by our ancestors ; and the responsibility is often, with exultation, thrown upon the mother country. Now, 4 THE LANDMARK OF FREEDOM. without .stoppin;r to inquire into the value Morocco, by its untutored ruler, has ex- ofthis ai>nlo_'y, wtiirh is never adduced in pressed its desire, stamped in the formal behalf of othr'r ahuses, and which availed terms of a treaty, that the very name of nolhini; a:Tainst that kiMi,dy i)0wer, im- Slavery may perish from the minds of men ; posed "hy^the mother country, uliich and only recently, from the Dey of our fathers overthrew, it is suHicicnt for Tunis, has proceeded that noble act, the present purpose, to know, that it is now by which, " in honor of God, and to dis- proposed to make slavery our own oriiri- tinguish man from the brute creation"— I nal art. Here is a fresh case of actual quote his own words — he decreed its to- transi,fression, which we cannot cast upon tal abolition throughout his dominions, the shoulders of any proirenitors, nor upon Let Christian America be willing to be any mother country, distant in Ume or tatight by these examples. God forbid place. The Congress of the United States, that our republic — " heir of all the ages, the people of the United States, at this day, j foremost in the files of lime'' — should in this vaunted period of liirht, will be re- adopt anew the barbarism which they sponsible for it, so that it shall be said here- have renounced. after, so long as the dismal history of sla- I As the effort now making is extraordi- very is road, that, in the year of Christ | nary in character, so no assumption 18.54. a new and deliberate act was passed, ' seems too extraordinary to be wielded in by which a vast Territory was opened to its support. The primal truth of the Equal- its inroads. | ity of men, proclaimed in our Declaration Alone in the compnnv of nations does of Independence, has been assailed, and our country assume this hateful champion- ; this Great Charter of our country discred- ship. In despotic Russia, the serfdom ' ited. Sir, you and I will soon pass away, which constitutes the " peculiar in?titu- ' but that charter will continue to stand tion " of that great empire, is never allowed 1 above impeachment or question. The Dec- to travel with the imperial tiag, according laration of Independence was a Decla- to the American pretension, into provinces ration of Rights, and the language em- newly acquired by the common blood and ployed, though general in its character, treasure, hut is carefully restricted by pos- j must obviously be restrained within the itivc prohibition, in hannony with the gen- | design and sphere of a Declaration of eral conscience, within its ancient con- Rights, involving no such absurdity as fines ; and this prohibition — the Wilmot was attributed to it yesterday by the Sen- proviso of Russia — is rigorously enforced ator from Indiana, [Mr. Pettit.] Sir, it on ever) side, in all the provinces, as in i is a palpable fact that men are not oorn Besarabiaon the south, and Poland on the equal in physical strength or in mental ca- west, so that, in fact, no Russian iiitbleman pacities, in beauty of form or health of has been able to move into these iinportant | body. These mortal cloaks of flesh dif- terrilorifs with his slaves. Thus Russia ' fer, as do these worldly garments. Di- spraks Ibr freedom, and disowns the slave- j vursity or inequality, in these respects, is holding dogma of our country. Far away i the law of creation. But as God is no in the East, at the "gateways of the day," respecter of persons, and as all are equal in elTi-minate India, slavery has been con- ! in his sight, whether Dives or Lazarus, demncd. In Coiistantinoi)le, the queeidy master or slave, so are all equal in natural seat of the most powerful Mohammedan | inborn rights; and, partlon me, if I say, empirr, where l)arl),iristii still luinijles wifli ' it is a vain sophism to adduce in argument civilization, the Utt(jman Sultan has fast- against this vital axiomof Liberty, the phys- ened upon it the stigma of disapprobation. The liarhary States of Africa, occu])ying ical or mental inequalities by which men are characterized, or the unhappy degra- Ihe same parallels of latitude with the dalion to which, in violation of a common slave Slates of our Union, and resembling brotherhood, they are doomed. To deny them in the nature of their boundaries, j the Declaration of Iiidependence is to their productions, their climate, and the rush ou the bosses of the shield of the peculiar institution," which sought shel- Almighty, which, in all respects, the sup- ter in i)oth, have been changed into abo lilii>iiists. Algiers, seated on the line of porters of this measure seem to do. To the delusive suggestion of the Sen- 3U'^ 30', has been dedicated toFieedoin. ator from North Carolii»^. '"'^^••* ^-t--vo "i SPEECH OF CHARLES SUMNER. that, by the overthrow of this prohibition, the number of slaves will not be increased : that there will be simply a beneficent diffu- sion of slavery, and not its extension, I reply at once, that this argument, if of any value — if not mere words and noth- ing else — would equally justify and re- quire the overthrow of the Prohibition of Slavery in the free States, and indeed, everywhere throughout the world. All the dikes which, in different countries, from time to time, with the march of civili- zation, have been painfully set up against the inroads of this evil, must be removed, and every land opened anew to its de- structive flood. It is clear, beyond dis- pute, that by the overthrow of this prohi- bition, slavery will be quickened, and slaves themselves will be multiplied, while " new room and verge" will be se- cured for the gloomy operations of slave law, under which free labor will droop, and a vast territory be smitten with sterility. Sir, a blade of grass would not grow where the horse of Attila had trod ; nor can any true prosperity spring up in the foot-prints of the slave. But it is argued that slaves will not be carried into Nebraska in large numbers, and that, therefore, the question is of small practical moment. My distinguished colleague, [Mr. Everett,] in his eloquent speech, hearkened to this apology, and allowed himself, while upholding the pro- hibition, to disparage its importance in a manner, from which I feel obliged kindly, but most strenuously, to dissent. Sir, the census shows that it is of vital con- sequence. There is Missouri, at this mo- ment, with Illinois on the east and Ne- braska on the west, all covering nearly the same spaces of latitude, and resenibling each other in soil, climate, and natural pro- ductions. Mark now the contrast! By the potent etlicacy of the ordinance of the Northwestern Territory, Illinois is now a free State, while Missouri has 87,422 slaves ; and the simple question which challenges an answer is, whether Nebras- ka shall be preserved in the condition of Illinois, or surrendered to that of Missouri? Surely this cannot be treated lightly. But for myself, I am unwilling to measure the exigency of the prohibition by the num- ber of persons, whether many or few, whom it may protect. Human rights, whether in a vast multitude or a solitary individual, are entitled to an equal and un- hesitating support. In this spirit, the flag of our country only recently became the impenetrable panoply of a homeless wan- derer, who claitned its protection in a distant sea ; and in this spirit I am con- strained to declare that there is no place accessible to human avarice, or human lust, or human force — whether in the lowest valley, or on the loftiest mountain top, whether on the broad flower-spangled prairies, or the snowy caps of the Rocky Mountains — where the Prohibition of Sla- very, like the commandments of the Deca- logue, should not go. But leaving these things behind, I press at once to the argument. I. And now, sir, in the name of that Pub- lic Faith, which is the very ligament of civil society, and which the great Roman ora- tor tells us it is detestable to break even with an enemy, I arraign this scheme, and hold it up to the judgment of all who hear me. There is an early Italian story of an experienced citizen, who, when told by his nephew that he had been studying, at the University of Bologna, the science of right, said in reply, " You have spent your time to little purpose. It would have been better had you learned the science o^ might, for that is worth two of the other;" and the bystanders of that day all agreed that the veteran spoke the truth. I begin, sir, by assuming that honorable Senators will not act in this spirit — that they will not substitute might for right — that they will not wantonly and flagitiously discard any obligation, pledge, or covenant, be- cause they chance to possess the power; but that, as honest men, desirous to do right, they will confront this question. Sir, the proposition before you involves not merely the repeal of an existing law, but the infraction of solemn obligations origi- nally proposed and assumed by the South, after a protracted and embittered contest, as a covenant of peace — with regard to certain specified territory therein de- scribed, namely : " All that Territory ceded by France to the United States, un- der the name of Louisiana; " according to which, in consideration of the admis- sion into the Union of Missouri as a slave State, slavery was forever prohibited in all the remaining part of this Territory which lies north of 36 deg. 30 min. This ar- THE LANDMARK OF FREEDOM. rangemont, between difleront sections I of the Union — the slave States of the ] first part and the free StatPs of the sec- j end part — though usually known as the | Missouri Compromise, was at the time ; styled a compact. In its stipulations for slavery, it was justly repugnant to the conscience of the North, and ought never to have been made ; but on that side it has been performed. And now the unper- formed outstanding obligations to Free- dom, originally proposed and assumed by the South, are resisted. Years have passed since these obliga- tions were embodied in the legislation of Congress, and accepted by the country. Meanwhile, the statesmen by whom they were framed and vindicated have, one by one, dropped from this earthly sphere. Their living voices cannot now be heard, to plead for the preservation of that Public Faith to which they were pledged. But this extraordinary lapse of time, with the complete fruition by one party of all the benefits belonging to it, under the compact, gives to the transaction an added and most sacred strength. Prescription steps in with new bonds, to confirm the oriwi- nal work, to the end that while men are mortal, controversies shall not be immor- tal. Death, with inexorable scythe, has mowed down the authors of this com- pact ; but, with conservative hour-glass, it has counted out a succession of years, which now defile before us, like so many sentinels, to guard the sacred landmark of Freedom. A simple statement of facts, derived from the journals of Congress and con- temporary records, will show the origin and nature of this compact, the influence by which it was established, and the obli- gations which it imposed. As early as 1818, at the first session of the fifteenth Congress, a bill was reported I to the House of Representatives, authori- | zing the people of the Missouri Territory } to form a Constitution and State Govern- i rnent, for the admission of such State into tho Union ; but, at that session, no I final action was had thereon. At the next I session, in February, 1819, the bill was ! again brought forward, when an eminent Representative of New York, whose life has been sj)ared till this last summer, Mr. \ James Tallmadge, moved a clause pro- hibiting any further introduction of slaves i into the proposed State, and securing free- dom to the children born within the State after its admission into the Union, on at- taining twenty-five years of age. This important proposition, which assumed a power not only to prohibit the ingress of slavery into the State itself, but also to abolish it there, was passed in the affirm- ative, after a vehemont debate of three days. On a division of the question, the first part, prohibiting the fiirthcr introduc- tion of slaves, was adopted by ^7 yeas to 76 nays ; the second i)art, j)roviding for the entancipation of children, was adopted by 82 yeas to 78 nays. Other propositions to thwart the operation of these amend- ments were voted down, and on tlie 17th of Febiuary the bill was read a third time, and passed, with these important restric- tions. In the Senate, after debate, the provi- sion for the emancipation of children was struck out by 31 yeas to 7 nays; the other provision, against the fiirther intro- duction of slavery, was struck out by 22 yeas to 16 nays. Thus emasculated, the bill was returned to the House, which, on March 2d, by a vote of 78 nays to 76 yeas, refused its concurrence. The Senate ad- hered to their amendments, and the House, by 78 yeas to 66 nays, adhered to their disagreement; and so at this session the Missouri bill was lost; and here was a temporary triumph of Freedom. Meanwhile, the same controversy was renewed on the bill pendinij at the same time for the organization of the Territory of Arkansas, then known as the southern part of the Territory of Missouri. The restrictions already adopted in the Mis- souri bill were moved hy Mr. Taylor, of New York, subsequently Speaker; but after at least six close votes, on the yeas and nays, in one of which the House was equally divided, 88 yeas to 88 nays, they were lost. Another proposition by Mr. Taylor, simpler in form, that slavery should not hereafter be introduced into this Territory, was lost by 90 nays to 86 yeas; and the Arkansas bill on February 25th was read the third time and passed. In the Senate, Mr. Burrill, of Rhode Island, moved, as an amendment, the i)ro- hibition of the fiirther introduction of sla- very into this Territory, which was lost by 19 nays to 14 yeas. And thus, without any provision for Freedom, Arkansas SPEECH OF CHARLES SUMNER. ^ M'as organized as a Territory; and here was a triumph of Slavery. At this same session, Alabama was ad- mitted as a slave State, without any restric- tion or objection. It was in the discussion on the Arkan- sas bill, at this session, that we find the earliest suggestion of a Compromise. De- feated in his eflbrts to prohibit slavery in this territory, Mr. Taylor stated that "he thought it important that some line should be designated beyond which slavery should not be permitted," and he moved its prohi- bition hereafter in all territories of the United States north of 36° 30', north lati- tude, without any exception of Missouri, which is north of this line. This proposi- tion, though withdrawn after debate, was at once welcomed by Mr. Livermore, of New Hampshire, "as made in the true spirit of compromise." It was opposed by Mr. Rhea, of Tennessee, on behalf of Slavery, who avowed himself against every restric- tion ; and also by Mr. Ogle, of Pennsyl- vania, on behalf of Freedom, who was "against any Compromise by which slavery, in any of the Territories, should be recognised or sanctioned by Congress." In this spirit it was opposed and sup- ported by others, among whom was Gen- eral Harrison, afterwards President of the United States, who " assented to the ex- pediency of establishing some such line of discrimination ;" but proposed a line "At the same time, I do not mean to ahandoa the policy to which I alluded in the commence- ment of my remarks. I think it but fair that both sections of the Union should be acconmiodated on this subject, with regard to which so much feeling has been manifested. The same great motives of policy which reconciled and harmoni- zed the jarring and discordant elements of our system originally, and which enabled the framers of our hapj)y Constitution to compromise the dif- ferent interests which then prevailed on this and other subjects, if properly cherished liy us, will enable us to achieve similar objects. If we meet upon i^rinciples of reciprocity, we cannot fail to do justice to all. // has alread)/ been avowed, hy gentlemen on this floor from the South and the West, that they ivill agree tipon a line whieh shall divide the slaveholding from the non-slnveholding States. It M thu proposition I am anxious to effect ; hut I wish to effect it hy some compact u-hich shall be bind- ing upon all parties, and all suhscquetit Legislatures; which cannot be changed, and will not fluctuate with the diversity of feeling and of sentiment to which this empire, in its march, must be destined. There is a vast and immense tract of country west of the x\Iississipi)i, yet to be settled, and intimately connected with the Northern section of the Union, upon which this compromise can be effected." The suggestions of Compromise were at this .time vain ; each party was de- termined. The North, by the prevailing voice of its representatives, claimed all for Freedom ; the South, by its potential command of the Senate, claimed all for Slavery. The report of this debate aroused the country. For the first time in our history, Freedom, after an animated struggle, hand due west from the mouth of the Des ! ;:^__h''i"^'_'i^d !^<^.^", ^^P^ in che^ck by Moines, thus constituting the northern, and not the southern boundary of Mis- souri, the partition line between Freedom and Slavery. But this idea of Compromise, though suggested by Taylor, was thus early adopt- ed and vindicated in this very debate, by an eminent character, Mr. Louis McLane, of Delaware, who has since held high office in the country, and enjoyed no common measure of public confidence. Of all the leading actors in these early scenes, he and Mr. Merckr alone aie yet spared. On this occasion he said : " The fixing of a line on the west of the jrississipjti, north of which slavery should not Slavery. The original policy of our Fathers in the restriction of slavery was sus- pended, and this giant wrong threatened to stalk into all the broad national domain. Men at the North were humbled and amazed. The imperious demands of slavery seemed incredible. Meanwhile, the whole subject was adjourned from Con- gress to the people. Through the press and at public meetings, an earnest voice was raised against the admission of Mis- souri into the Union without the restriction of slavery. Judges left the bench and clergymen the pulpit, to swell the indig- nant protest which went up from good men, without distinction of party or of be tolerated, had alicaya been with him a favorite ' P"I^l ' ' policy, and he hoped the day was not distant | The movement was not confined to a when, upon principles o^ fair compromise, it might ' k\\ persons, nor to a few States. A pub- constitutioually be effected. The present attempt He meeting at Trenton, in New Jersey, he regarded as premature." „,as followed by others in New York and After opposing the restriction on Mis- Philadelphia, and finally at Worcester, sourij he concluded by declaring : Salem, and Boston, where committees 8 THE LANDMARK OF FREEDOM. were organized to rally the country. The j citizens of Balliinore, convened at the | court-house, wiih tlie Mayor in the chair, resolved that the future admission of slaves into the States hereafter formed west of tlie i Mississijjpi, ought to be prohihilcd by i Congress. Villages, towns, and cities, by I memorial, petition, and prayer, called upon , Congress to maintain the great principle of tlie prohibition of slavery. The same principle was also commended by the reso- | lutions of State Legislatures ; and Pennsyl- vania, inspired by the teachings of Fraidi- j Jin and the convictions of the respectable | denomination of f^riends, unanimously asserted at once the right and the duty of Congress to prohibit slavery west of the i Mississippi, and solemnly appealed to her I sister States "to refuse to covenant with i crime." New Jersey and Delaware fol- lowed, both also unanimously. Ohio as- serted the same principle ; so did also In- diana. The latter State, not content with j providing for the future, severely cen- ] sured one of its Senators, for his vote to , organize Arkansas without the prohibition j of slavery. The resolutions of New York were reinforced by the recommendation of , De Witt Clinton. i Amidst these excitements, Congress I came together in December, 1S19, taking possession of these Halls of the Capitol for th.' first time since their desolation by ; the British. On the day after the receipt of the President's Message, two several | committees of the House were consti- ' tuted, one to consider the a])plication of Maine, and the other of Missouri, to enter the Union as separate and independent States. With only ihe delay of a single day, the bill for the admission of Missouri was reported to the House without the re- striction of slavery; but, as if shrinking from the immediate discussion of the prcMt question it involved, afterwards, on the j motion of ]\Ir. Mkrcer, of Virginia, its I consideration was postponed for several ' weeks ; all which, be it observed, is in open contrast with the manner in which ' the present discussion has been precii)i- tatcd upon Congress. Meanwhile, the Maine bill, when reported to the House, was promi)tly acted upon, and sent to the Senate. In the interval between the report of the Missouri bill and its consideration by the House, a committee was constituted, on motion of Mr. Tatlou, of New York, to inf|uire into the expediency of pro- hibiting the introduction of slavery into the Territories west of the Mississippi. This committee, at the end of a fortnight, was discharged from further consideration of the subject, which, it was understood, would enter into the postponed debate on the Missouri bill. This early effort to interdict slavery in the Territories by a special law is worthy of notice, on account of some of the expressi()ns of opinion which it drew forth. In the course ol" his remarks, Mr. Taylor declared, that "he presumed there were no members — he knew of none — who doubted the consti- tutional power of Congress to impose such a restriction on the Territories. A generous voice from Viririnia recog- nised at once the right and duty of Con- gress. This was from Charles Fenton Mercer, who declared that " When the question proposed should come fairly be- fore the House, he should support the proposition. He should record his vote against suffering the dark cloud of inhu- manity, which now darkened his country, from rolling on beyond the peaceful shores of the Mississippi." At length, on the 26lh January, 1S20, the House resolved itself into Committee of the Whole on the Missouri Bill, and proceeded with its discussion, day by day, till the 28th of February, when it was reported back with amendments. But meanwhile the same question was present- ed to the Senate, where a conclusion was reached earlierthan in the House. A clause for the admission of Missouri was moved by way of lack to the Maine bill. To this an amendment was moved by Mr. Roberts, of Pennsylvania, prohibiting the further intro- duction of slavery into the State, which, alter a fortnight's debate, was defeated by 27 nays to 16 yeas. The debate in the Senate was of unusual interest and splendor. It was especially illustrated by an effort of transcendent power from that great lawyer and orator, William Pinkney. Recently returned from a succession of missions to foreign courts, and at this time the acknowledged chiefof the American bar, particularly skill- ed in (juestions of constitutional law, his course as a Senator from Maryland was calculated to produce a profound impres- sion. In a speech which for two days drew SPEECH OF CIlAKLKb bUM:\-£R'. to this chamber an admiring throng, [ Compact or Compromise, the essential and at the time was fondly compared with the best examples of Greece and conditions of which were, the admission of Missouri as a State without any restric- Rome, he first authoritatively proposed and j lion of slavery ; and the prohibition of developed the Missouri Compromise. His masterly effort was mainly directed against the restriction upon Missouri, but it began and ended with the idea of compromise. "Notwithstanding," he says, "occasional appearances of rather an unfavorable de- scription, T have long since persuaded my- self that the JfmoMrt guestion, as it is call- ed, might be laid to rest, with innocence and safety, by some conciliatory Compro- mise at least, by which, as is our duty, we might reconcile the extremes of conflict- ing views and feelings, without any sacri- fice of constitutional principles." And he closed with the hope that the restriction on Missouri would not be pressed, but that the whole question "might be disposed of in a manner satisfactory to all, by a pos- itive prohibition of slavei-y in the Terri- tory to the north and west of Missouri." This authoritative proposition of Com- promise, from the most powerful advocate of the unconditional admission of Missou- ri, was made in the Senate on the 21st of January. From various indications, it seems to have found prompt favor in that body. Finally, on the 17th of February, the union of Maine and Missouri in one bill prevailed there, by 23 yeas to 21 nays. On the next day, Mr. Thomas, of Illi- slavery in all the remaining Territory of Louisiana north of 36 deg. 30 min. Janus- faced, with one front towards Freedom and another towards Slavery, this must not be confounded with the simpler proposi- tion of Mr. Taylor, at the last session, to prohibit slavery in all tiie territory north of 36 deg. 30 min., including Missouri. The compromise now brought forward — following the early lead of Mr. McLane — both recognised and prohibited slavery north of 36 deg. 30 min. Here, for the first time, these two opposite principles com- mingled in one legislative channel ; and it is immediately subsequent to this junc- tion that we discern the precise responsi- bility assumed by different parties. And now observe the indubitable and decisive fact. This bill, thus composed, containing these two elements — this double meas- ure — finally passed the Senate by a test vote of 24 yeas to 20 nays. The yeas em- braced every Southern Senator, except Nathaniel Macon, of North Carolina, and William Smith, of South Carolina. Mr. Butler, (interrupting.) Mr. Gail- lard, of South Carolina, voted with Mr. Smith. Mr. Sumner. No, sir. The Journal, which I now hold in my hand, shows that nois, who had always voted with the South I he voted for the Compromise. I repeat, against any restriction upon Missouri, in- troduced the famous clause prohibiting slavery north of 36 deg. 30 min., which now constitutes the eighth section of the Missouri act. An effort was made to in- clude the Arkansas Territory within this prohibition ; but the South united against that the yeas on this vital question em- braced every Southern Senator, except Mr. Macon and Mr. Smith. The nays em- braced every Northern Senator, except the two Senators from Illinois and one Sena- tor from Rhode Island, and one from New Hampshire. And this, sir, is the record of this extension of the area of Freedom, and i the first stage in the adoption of the Mis- it was defeated by 24 nays to 20 yeas. The prohibition, as moved by Mr. Thomas, then prevailed, by 34 yeas to only 10 nays. Among those in the afSrmative were both the Senators from each of the slave States, Louisiana, Tennessee, Kentucky, Dela- ware, Maryland, and Alabama, and also one of the Senators from each of the slave States, Mississippi and North Carolina, in- cluding in the honorable list the familiar souri Compromise. First openly announ- ced and vindicated on the floor of the Sen- ate, by a distinguished Southern states- man, it was forced on the North by an al- most unanimous Southern vote. While thinors had thus culminated in the Senate, discussion was still proceed- ing in the other House on the original Missouri bill. This was for a moment arrested by the reception from the Senate names of William Pinkney, James Brown, I of the Maine bill, embodying the Mis and William Rufus King. I souri Compromise. Upon this the debate This bill, thus amended, is the first j was brief and the decision prompt. But legislative embodiment of the Missouri] here, even at this stage, as at every other, a 10 THE LANDMARK OF FREEDOM. Southern statesman intervenes. Mr. Smith, of Maryland, for many years an eminent Senator of that State, but at tliis timo a Representative, while opposing the restric- tion of Missouri, vindicated the piohibi- tion of slavery in the Territories, and thus practically accepted the Compromise : '• Mr. ri. J^MiTii said that he rose principally with a view to state his uiuU'rstanding of the jiroposed amendment, viz: That it retained tlie boundaries of Missouri as delineated in the bill ; that it pro- hibited the admission of slaves west of the west line of Missouri, and north of the north line; that it did not interfere with the Territory of Arkan- sas, or the uninhabited land west thereof, lie ihouyht Ihe projw.ntion not (xcrpiionabh-. but doubted the propriety of its forming^ a part of the bill. He considered the power of ("ongress over the Terri- tory as supreme, unlimited, before its admission ; that Congress could imjiose on its Territories any restriction it thought proper; that if citizens go into the Territories thus restricted, they cannot carry with them slaves. They will be without slaves, and will be educated with prejudices and habits such as v\ill exclude all desire, on their ])art, to admit slavery when they shall become sufficiently numerous to be admitted as a JState. And this is the advantage proposed by the amendment." But the House was not disposed to abandon the substantial restriction of sla- very in Missouri, for vvliat seemed its un- substantial prohibition in an unsettled Territory. The Compromise was rejected, and the bill left in its original condition. This was done by large votes. Even the prohibition of slavery was thrown out by 159 yeas to 18 nays, both the North and the South uniting against it; though, in this small but persistent minority, we find two Southern statesmen, Samuel Smith and Charles Fenton Mercer. The Senate, on receiving the bill back from the House, insisted on their amendments. The House in turn insisted on their disairreement. According to parliamentary usage, a Com- mittee of Conference between the two Houses was appoined. Mr. Thomas, of Illinois, Mr. Pinkney, of Maryland, and Mr. James Barbour, of Virginia, com- posed this important committee on the part of the Senate; and Mr. Holmes, of Maine, Mr. Taylor, of New York, Mr. Lowndes, of South Carolina, ]\Ir. Parker, of Massachusetts, and JMr. Kinsey, of New Jersey, on the ])art of the House. Meanwhile, the House had voted on the original Missouri bill. An amend- ment, peremptorily interdicting all slavery in the new State, was adopted by 94 yeas to 86 nays ; and thus the bill passed the House, and was sent to the Senate, I INIarch 1st. Thus, after an e.xasperated \ and protracted discussion, the two Houses j were at a dead-lock. The double-headed I Missouri Compromise, was the ultimatum I of the Senate. The restriction of slavery in Missouri, involving, of course, its pro- hibition in all the unorganized Territories, was the ultimatum of the House.- At this stage, on the Sd of March, the Committee of Conference made their re- port, which was urged at once upon the House by Mr. Lowndes, the distinguished Representative from South Carolina, and one of her most precious sons. And here sir, at the mention of this name, still so fragrant among us, let me for one mo- ment stop this current of history, to express the tender admiration with which I am in- spired. Mr. Lowndes died before my memory of political events; but he is still endeared by the single utterance — ihat ihe Presidency is an office nevtr to be sought — which, by its beauty, shames the vileness of aspiration in our day, and will ever live as an amaranthine flower. Such a man on any occasion would be a host ; but he now threvv his great soul into the^work. He even objected to a motion to print the report, on the ground "that it would imply a determination in the House to delay a decision of the subject to-day, which he had hoped the House was fully prepared for." The question then came, on striking out the restriction in the Mis- souri bill. The report in the JMhtional In- telligencer says : " Mr. Lowndes spoke briefly in support of the Compromise recommended bj- the Committee of Conference, and urged with great earnestness the propriety of a decision which would restore tran- quillity to the country, which was demanded by e.Cerv consideration of discretion, of moderation, of wisdom, and of virtue. " Mr. Meuceu, of Virginia, followed on the same side with great earnestness, and had spoken about half an hour, when he was compelled by indispo- sition to resume his seat." Such efforts, pressed with Southern ar- dor, were not unavailing. In conformity with the report of the committee, the whole (juestion was forthwith put at rest. Maine and Missouri were each admitted into the Union as independent States. The restriction of slavery in Missouri was abandoned by a vote in the House of 90 yeas to 87 nays ; and the prohibition of SPEECH OF CHARLES SUMNER. 11 slavery in all Territories north of 36 deg> 30 min., exclusive of Missouri, was sub- stituted by a vote of 134 yeas to 42 nays. Amono-the distinoruished Southern names • T in the affirmative, are Louis McLane, of Delaware; Samuel Smith, of Maryland; William Lowndes, of South Carolina ; and Charles Fenton Mercer, of Virginia. The title of the Missouri bill was amend- ed in conformity with this prohibition, by adding the words, "and to prohibit slavery in certain Territories." The bills then passed both Houses without a di- vision ; and, on the morning of the 3d March, 1820, the Jfational Intelligencer contained an exulting article, entitled : "The Question Settled." Another paper, published in Baltimore, immediately after the passage of the Com- promise, vindicated it as a perpetual com- pact, which could not be disturbed. The language is so clear and strong that I will read it, although it has been already quoted \ by my able and most excellent friend from Ohio, [Mr. Chase :] "/i! is true the Compromncia supported only hy the letter of the Iom; rcpenlabh by the authority which enacted it; hut the circumstances of the case yive this law a moral force equal to that of a positive jyrovision of the Constitution ; and ice do not hazard anything by saying that the Constitution exists in its observance. Both parties have sacrificed much to conciliation. We xcish to see the compact kept in good faith, and we trust that a kind Providence will open the w.ay to relieve us of an evil which every good citizen deprecates as the supreme curse of the country." — Giles's Reqister. Sir, the distinguished leaders in this set- tlement were all from the South. As early as February, 1819, Louis McLane, of Del- aware, had urged it upon Congress, " by some compact binding upon all subsequent Legislatures." It was in 1820 brought for- ward and upheld in the Senate by William PiNKNEY, of Maryland, and passed in that body by the vote of every Southern Sen- ator except two, against the vote of every Northern Senator except four. In the House, it was welcomed at once by Sam- uel Smith, of Maryland, and Charles Fenton Mercer, of Virginia. The Com- mittee of Conference, through which it finallj prevailed, was filled, on the part of the Senate, with inflexible partisans of the South, such as might fitly represent the sentiments of its President, John Gail- lard, a Senator from South Carolina; on the part of the House, it was nominated by Henry Clay, the Speaker, and Represent- ative from Kentucky. This committee, thus constituted, drawing its double life from the South, was unanimous in favor of the Compromise. A private letter from Mr. PiNKNEY, written at the time, and pre- served by his distinguished biographer, shows that the report made by the com- mittee came from him : "The bill for the admission of Missouri into the Union (icit/iout restriction as to slavery) may be considered as past. That bill was scut back again this morning from the House, with the restriction as to Stavei-y. The senate voted to amend it by striking out the restriction, (27 to 15,) and proposed, as another amendment, what I have all along been the advocate of a restriction upon the vacant territory to the north and. west, as to slavery. To-night the House of Representa- tives have aggreed to both of these amendments, in opposition to their former votes, and this aflair is settled. To-morrow we shall (of course) recede from our amendments as to I\Iaine, (our object being effected,) and both States will be admitted. This happy rrsidt has been aerompli.' Sydney, to whom Abolitionist : " He never would concur in upholding domestic slavery. It was a the latter epithet has been reserved- who, as a member of the Abolition Society nefarious institution. It was the curse of of New York, had only recently united in Heaven." In another mood, and with ' a solemn petition for those who, " though mild, juridical phrase, J\Ir. Madison free by the laios of God, are held in slavery "thought it wrong to admit in the Consti- tution the idea of property in man." And Washington, in letters written near this period — which completely describe the aims of an Abolitionist — avowed " that it was among his first wishes to see some plan adopted by which slavery may be abolished by law," and that to this end "his suffrage should not be wantinor." In this spirit was the National Constitu- tion adopted. In this spirit the National Government was first organized under Washington. And here there is a fact of peculiar significance, to which I have by the' laws of the State." There, too, was a noble spirit, of spotless virtue, and com- manding influence, the ornament of human nature, who, like the sun, ever held an unerring course, John Jay. Filling the important post of Minister of Foreign Af- fairs under the Confcdc^ration, he found time to organi/-e the Abolition Society of New York, and to act as its President, until by the nomination of Washington he became Chief Justice of the United States. In his sight, slavery was an " iniquity" — " a sin of crimson dye," against which ministers of the gospel should testify, and SPEECH OF CHARLES SUMNER. which the Government should seek in ev ery way to abolish. " Were I in the Legisla ture," he wrote, " I would present a btll for | land of F the purpose with great care, and I would never cease moving it till it became a law or I ceased to be a member. Till America comes into this measure, her prayers to Heaven will be impious." By such men was Washington surrounded, while from his own Virginia came the voice of Patrick Henry, amidst confessions that he was a master of slaves, crying, " I will not, I can- not justify it. However culpable my con- duct, I will so far pay my devoir to virtue as to own the excellence and rectitude of her precepts, and lament my want of con- formity to them." Such words as these, fitly coming from our leaders, belong to the true glories of the country : " While we such precedents can boast at home. Keep thy Fabricius and thy Cato, Rome ! " The earliest Congress under the Con- stitution adopted the Ordinance of Free- dom for the Northwestern Territory, and thus ratified the prohibition of Slavery in all the existing Territories of the Union. In the list of those who sanctioned this act were men fresh from the labors of the Con- vention, and therefore familiar with its policy. But there is another voice which bears testimony in the same direction. Among the petitions presented to the first Congress, was one from the Abolition So- ciety of Pennsylvania, signed by Benja- min Franklin, as President. This vener- able votary of Freedom, who throughout a long life had splendidly served his coun- try at home and abroad — who, as states- man and philosopher, had won the admi- ration of mankind — who had ravished the lightning from the skies and the sceptre from the tyrant — whose name, signed to the Declaration of Independence, gave added importance even to that great in- strument, and then again signed to the Constitution of the United States, filled ii with the charm of wisdom — in whom, more than in any other man, the true spirit of American Institutions, at once practical and humane, was embodied — who knew intimately the purposes and aspirations of the founders — this veteran statesman, then eighty-four years of age, appeared at the bar of that Congress, whose powers he had helped to define and establish, and, by the 15 countenance the restoration of liberty to those unjiappy men, who alone, in this reedom, are degraded into per- petual bondage," and "that it would step to the very verge Of the power vested in it for DISCOURAGING every species of traffic in the persons of our icilow men." Only a short time after uttering this prayer, the patriot sage descended to the tomb ; but he seems still to call upon Congress, in memorable words, io step to the very verge of the powers vested in it to discourage slavery; and this prayer, now sounding from the tomb of Franklin, |)roclaims the true national policy of the Fathers. Not encouragement, but discouragement of slavery, not its nationalization, but its de- nationalization, was their rule. Tiie memorial of Franklin, with other memorials of a similar character, was re- ferred to a committee, and much debated in the House, which finally sanctioned the following resolution, and directed the same to be entered upon its journals, viz : " That Congress have no authority to interfere in the emancipation of slaves, or in the treatment of them, within any of the States ; it remamint/ u-ith the several States to provide any reyuladons therein, which humanity and true policy may require." This resolution, declaring the principle of non-intervention by Congress with sla- very in the States, was adopted by the same Congress which had solemnly af- firmed the prohibition of slavery in all the existing territory of the Union; and not only by the same Congress, but at the same session, so that one may be regarded as the complement of the other. And it is on these double acts, at the first organ- ization of the Government, and the record- ed sentiments of the founders, that I take my stand, and challenge all question. At this time there was strictly no divi- ding line in the country between Anti- Slavery and Pro-Slavery. The Anti-Slavery sentiment was thoroughly national, broad and general, pervading alike all parts of the Union, and uprising from the com- mon heart of the entire people. The Pro- Slavery interest was strictly personal and pecuniary, and had its source simply in the self-interest of individual slaveholders. It contemplated slavery only as a domestic institution — not as a political element — and merely stipulated for its security where last political act of his long life, solemnly it actually existed within the States, entreated " that it would be pleased to Sir, the original policy of the country, 16 THE LANDMARK OF FREEDOM. begun under the Confederation, and rec- ognised at the initiation of the new Gov- ernmc'iit, is clear and unmistakable. Coin- ])endiously cxitresscd, it was iion-inlervcn- iion by Conirress wif/i slavery in ihe Slates, and its prohibition in all the national domain. In this way, the discordant fcfliiigs on this subject were reconciled. Slavoinas- ters were left at home in their respective States, under tiie protection of local laws, to hug slavery, without any interference from Congress, while all opposed to it were exempted from any responsibility therefor in the national domain. This, sir, is the common ground on which our political fabric was reared ; and I do not hesitate to say that it is the only ground on which it can stand in permanent peace. It is beyond question, sir, that our Con- stitution was framed by the lovers of Hu- man Rights ; that it was animated by their divine spirit; that the institution of sla- very was regarded by them with aversion, so that, though covertly alluded to, it was not named in the instrument ; that, accordingf to the debates in the Conven- tion, they refused to give it any " sanc- tion," and looked forward to the certain day when it would be obliterated from the land. But the original policy of the Government did not long prevail. The generous sentiments which filled the early patriots, giving to them historic grandeur, gradually lost their power. The blessings of freedom being already secured to themselves, the freemen of the land grew indifferent to the freedom of others. They ceased to think of the slaves. The slave-masters availed them- selves of this indifference, and, though few in numbers, compared with the non- slaveholders, even in the slave States, (according to the late census they are fewer than 300,000,) they have, under the influence of an imagined self-interest, by the skillful tactics of party, and especially by an unhesitating, persevering union among themselves — swaying, by turns, both the great political parties — succeed- ed, through a long succession of years, in obtaining the control of the National Gov- ernment, biMiding it to their purposes, compelling it to do their will, and imposing upon it a policy friendly to Slavery; offen- sive to Freedom only, and directly opposed to the sentiments of its founders. Our Re- public has swollen in population and pow- er; but it has shrunk in character. It is not now what it was at the beginning, a Republic merely permitting, while it re- gretted slavery ; tolerating it only where it could not be removed, and interdicting it where it did not exist — but a mighty Prop- agandist, openly favoririir and vindicating it; visiting, also, with displeasure all who oppose it. Sir, our country earlv reached heights which it could not keep. Its fall was gen- tle but complete. At the session of Con- gress immediately following the ratifica- tion of the Prohibition of Slavery in the national domain, a transfer of the territory now constituting Tennessee was accept- ed from North Carolina, (April 2, 1790,) loaded with the express condition " that no regulation made, or to be made, should tend to emancipate slaves; " a formal pro- vision, which, while admitting the power of Congress over slavery in the Territories, I waived the prevailing policy of executing \ it. This was followed, in 1798, by the transfer from Georgia of the region be- \ tween her present western limit and the Mississippi, under a similar condition. In both these cases, an apology may be found in the very terms of the transfers, and in the fact that the region constituted a part I of two States where slavery actually exist- I ed; though it will be confessed that even j here there was a descent from that summit j of Freedom on which the Nation had so proudly rested : '-From morn To noon he fell; from no])iness. In an age of civilization and in a land of rights, sla- very may still be tolerated in fac't ; but its prohibition, witliin a luunicipal jurisdic- tion, bv the Government thereof, as by one of the States of the Union, cannot be con- sidered an infraction of natural rights; nor can its prohibition by Congress in the Territories be regarded as an infringe- ment of the local sovereignty, founded, as it must be, on natural rights. But another argument is pressed, most fallacious in its character. It is asserted that, inasmuch as the Territories were ac- quired by the common treasure, they are the common properly of tlie whole Union; and, therefore, n« citizen can be prevented from moving into them with his slaves, without an infringement oftlie equal rights and privileges which belong to him as a citizen of the United States. But, it is admitted that the people of this very Ter- ritory, when organized as a State, may ex- clude slaves, and in this way abridge an asserted right founded on the common property in the Territoiy. Now, if this SPEECH OF CHARLES SUMNER. 19 can be done by the few thousand settlers who constitute the State Government, tlie whole argument founded on the acquisi- tion of the Territories, by a common treas- ure, seems futile and evanescent. But this argument proceeds on an as- sumption which cannot stand. It assumes that slavery is a national institution, and that property in slaves is recognised by the Constitution of the United States. Nothing can be more false. By the judo-- ment of the Supreme Court of the United States, and also by the principles of the common law. Slavery is a local municipal Institution, which derives its support exclu- sively from local municipal laws, and be- yond the sphere of these laws it ceases to ^xist, except so far as it may be preserved 3y the clause for the rendition of fugitives from labor. Madison thought it wronar to idmit into the Constitution the idea that :here can be property in man ; and I re- oice to believe that no such idea can be found there. The Constitution resrards slaves always as " persons," with the rights af " persons," never as property. When it is said, therefore, that every citizen may enter the national domain with his prop- erty, it does not follow, by any rule of logic or of law, that he may carry his slaves. On the contrary, he can only carry that property which is admitted to be such by the universal law of nature, writ- ten by God's own finger on the heart of man. Again : The relation of master and slave is sometimes classed with the domestic relations. Now, while it is unquestionably among the powers of any State, within its own jurisdiction, to change the existing relation of husband and wife, and to es- tablish polygamy, I presume no person would contend that a polygamous hus- band, resident in one of the States, would be entitled to enter the national Territory with his harem — his property, if you please — and there claim immunity. Clearly, when he passes the bounds of that local jurisdiction, which sanctions polyg- amy, the peculiar domestic relation would cease ; and it is precisely the same with slavery. Sir, I dismiss these considerations. The prohibition of slavery in the Terri- tory of Nebraska stands on foundations of idamant, upheld by the early policy of the Fathers, by constant precedent, and time-honored compact. It is now in your power to overturn it; you may remove the sacred landmark, and open the whole vast domain to Slavery. To you is committed this high prerogative. Our fathers, on the eve of the Revolution, set forth in burning words, among their griev- ances, that George III, " in order to keep open a market where men should be bought and sold, had prostituted his neg- ative for suppressing every legislative at- tempt to prohibit or restrain this execrable commerce." Sir, like the English mon- arch, you may now prostitute your power to this same purpose. But you cannot es- cape the judgment of the world, nor the doom of history. It will be in vain, that, while doing this thing, you plead, in apology, the princi- ple of self-gove?-nme7it , which you profess to recognise in the Territories. Sir, this very principle, when truly administered, secures equal rights to all, without dis- tinction of color or race, and makes sla- very impossible. By no rule of justice, and by no subtlety of political metaphys- ics, can the right to hold a fellow-man in bondage be regarded as essential to self- government. The inconsistency is too fla- grant. It is apparent on the bare state- ment. It is like saying iwo and two make three. In the name of liberty you open the door to slavery. With professions of Equal Rights on the lips, you trample on the rights of Human Nature. With a kiss upon the brow of that fair Territory, you betray it to wretchedness and shame. Well did the patriot soul exclaim, in bitter words, wrung out by bitter experience : " Oh Liberty ! what crimes are done in thy name !" In vain, sir, you will plead, that this measure proceeds from the North, as has been suggested by the Senator from Ken- tucky, [Mr. Dixon.] Even if this were true, it would be no apology. But, precip- itated as this bill has been upon the Sen- ate, at a moment of general calm, and in the absence of any controlling exigency, and then hurried to a vote in advance of the public voice, as if fearful of arrest, it cannot be justly called the offspring of any popular sentiment. In this respect it dif- fers widely from the Missouri prohibition, which, after solemn debate, extending through two sessions of Congress, and ample discussion before the people, was 20 THE LANDMARK OF FREEDOM. adopted. Certainly there is, as yet, no ev- idence that this measure, though support- ed by Nortliern men, proceeds from that Northern sentiment which is to ho found, stroncr and fresh, in the schools, the churches, and homes of the people. Pop- uli omnes ad aquilonf.m /)os?7?' Ijberintem qiKindnm spirant. And could this scheme be now submitted -to the awakened mil- lions whose souls have been truly ripoii'Ml under Northern skies, it would be branded at once with an indi^mant and undying condemnation. I3ut the race of men, " white slaves of the North," described and despised by a Southern statesman, is not yet extinct there, sir. It is one of the melancholy to- kens of the pf)wer of slavery, under our political system, and especially through the operations of the National Govern- ment, thiit it loosens and destroys the char- acter of Northern men, exerting its subtle inlluonce even at a distance — like the black niairnetic mountain in the Arabian story, under whose irresistible attraction the iron bolts, which held together the strong tim- bers of a stately ship, securely floating on the distant wave, were drawn out, till the whole fell apart, and became a disjointed wreck. Alas ! too often those principles, which give consistency, individuality, and form, to the Northern character, which ren- der it stanch, strong, and seaworthy, which bind it together as with iron, are sucked out, one by one, like the bolts of the ill-fated vessel, and from the miserable, loosened fragments is formed that human anomaly — a JS^orthern man with Southern principles. Sir — No such man can speak for the North. [Here there was an interruption of pro- longed applause in the galleries.] The PilESIDENT, (Mr. Stuart in the chair.) The Chair will be oblijred to direct the galleries to be cleared, if order is not preserved. No ajiplausc; will be allowed. Several Voices. Let them be cleared now. Mr. SUMNER. Mr. President, I ad- vance now to considerations of a more general character, to which I ask your best attention. Sir, this bill is proposed as a measure of peace. In this way you vainly think to withdraw the subject of slavery from National politics. This is a mistake. Peace ilepeiids on mutual contideuce. It can never rest secure on broken faith and injustice. And, sir, pi.'rmit me to say, frankly, sincerely, and earnestly, that the subject of slavery can never be withdrawn from tlie National politics, until we return once more to the original policy of our fathers, at the first organization of the Government, under Washington, when the National ensign nowhere on the National territory covered a siuide slave. Slavery, which our fathers branded as an " evil," a " curse," an " enormity," a " ne- farious institution," is condemned at the North by the strongest convictions of the reason and the best sentiments of the heart. It is the onlv subject within the field of National politics which excites any real interest. The old matters which have divided the minds of men hav^ lost their importance. One by one they have disappeared, leaving the ground to be oc- cupied by a question grander far. The Bank, Sub-Treasurv, the Distribution of the Public Lands, are each and all obso- lete issues. Even the Tarrifl'is not a ques- tion on which opposite political parties are united in taking opposite sides. And now, instead of these superseded ques- tions, which were filled for the most part with the odor of the dollar, the country is directly summoned to consider face to face a cause which is connected with all that is divine in religion, with all that is pure and noble in morals, with all that is truly practical and constitutional in politics. Unlike the other questions, it is not tem- porary or local in its character. It belongs to all times and to all countries. Though long kept in check, it now, by your intro- , duction, confronts the people, demanding to be heard. To every man in the land it says, with clear, penetrating voice, "Are you for Freedom, or are you for Slavery? " And every nian in the land must answer this question when he votes. Pass this bill, and it will be in vain that you say, the Slavery Question is settled. Sir, jiofhing can be settled which is not right. Nothing can be settled which is adverse to Freedom. God, nature and all the liolv sentiments of the heart, repudiate any such false seeming settlement. Now, sir, mark the clear line of our duty. And here let me speak for those with whom, in minority and defeat, I am proud to be associated, the Independent l)eiuocrats, who espouse that Demoracy which is triinsligured in the Declaration of Independence and the injunctions of Christianity. The testimony which we bear against slavery, as against all other SPEECH OF CHARLES StJMNER. 21 wrong, is in different ways, according to our position. The slavery, which exists under other Governments — as in Russia or Turkey — or in other States of the Union, as in Virginia and Carolina, we can oppose only through the influence of literature, morals, and religion, without in any way invokino- the Political Power. Nor is it proposed to act otherwise. But slavery, where we are parties to it — where we are responsible for it — everywhere within our jurisdiction — must be opposed, not only by all the influence of literature, morals, and religion, but directly by every instru- ment of Political Power. In the States it is sustained by local laws, and although we may be compelled to share the shame, which its presence inflicts upon the fair fame of the country, yet it receives no direct sanction at our hands. We are not responsible for it. The wrong is not at our own particular doors. It is not within our jurisdiction. But slavery everywhere under the Constitution of the United States — everywhere within the exclusive jurisdiction of the National Government — everywhere under the National Flag, is at our own particular doors, within the sphere of our own personal responsibility, and exists there in defiance of the original pol- icy of our Fathers and of the true princi- ples of the Constitution. It is a mistake to say, as is often charged, that we seek to interfere, through Con- gress, with slavery in the States, or in any way to direct the legislation of Congress upon subjects not within its jurisdiction. Out political aims, as well as our political duties, are co-extensive with our polilical responsibilities. And since we at the North are responsible for slavery wherever it exists under the jurisdiction of Congress, it is unpardonable in us not to exert every power we possess to enlist Congress against it. Such is our cause. To men of all par- ties and opinions, who wish well to the Republic, and would preserve our good name, it appeals. Alike to the Conserva- tive and the Reformer, it appeals ; for it stands on the truest Conservatism and the truest Reform. In seeking the reform of existing evils, we seek also the conserva- tion of the principles of our fathers. The cause is not sectional. Oh, no ! sir, it is not sectional ; for it simply aims to estab- lish under the National Government those great principles of Justice and Humanity, which are broad and universal as man. As well might it be said that Jeff'erson, Franklin, and Washington, were sectional. It is not aggressive ; for it does not seek in any way to interfere, through Congress, with slavery in the States. It is not con- trary to the Constitution ; for it recognises this paramount law, and in the administra- tion of the Government invokes the spirit "of its founders. Sir, it is not hostile to the quiet of the country ; for it proposes the only course by which agitation can be allayed, and quiet be permanently estab- lished. It is not uncommon to hear persons declare that they are against slavery, and are willing to unite in any practical efforts to make this opposition felt. At the same time, they pharisaically visit with condem- nation, with reproach or contempt, the earnest souls who for years have striven in this struggle. To such I would say — could I reach them now with my voice — if you are sincere in what you declare ; if your words are not merely lip-service ; if in your hearts you are entirely willing to join in any practical eflorts against slavery, then by your lives, by your conversation, by your influence, by your votes — disre- garding " the ancient forms of party strife " — seek to carry the principles of Freedom into the National Government, wherever its jurisdiction is acknowledged and it power can be felt. Thus, without any interference with the States, which are beyond this jurisdiction, may you help to erase the blot of slavery from our National brow. Do this, and you will most truly promote the harmony which you so much desire. You will establish tranquillity throughout the country. Then at last, sir, the Slavery Question will be settled. Banished from its usurped foothold under the National Government, slavery will no longer enter, with distracting force, into the National politics — making and unmaking laws, making and unmaking Presidents. Con- fined to the States, where it was left by the Constitution, it will take its place as a local institution — if, alas ! continue it must ! — for which we are in no sense responsible, and against which we cannot exert any political power. Wc shall be relieved from our present painful and irri- tating connection with it. The exi^sting antagonism between the North and South will be softened ; crimination and rccrim- 22 THE LANDMARK OF FREEDOM. ination will cease; the wishes of the' Fathers will be fulfilled, and this Great Evil be left to the kindly influences of morals and reli^rion, and the prevailing laws of social economy. I am not blind to the adverse signs. But this I see clearly. Amidst all seem- ing discouraffements, the "reat omens are with us. Art, literature, poetry, religion — everything which elevates m:in — all are on our side. The plow, the steam-engine, the railroad, the telegraph, the book, every human improvement, every generous word anywhere, every true j)uIsation of every heart which is not a mere muscle, and nothing else, gives new encouragement to the warfare with slavery. The discus- sion will proceed. The devices of party can no longer stave it off. The subter- fuges of the politician cannot escape it. The tricks of the olfice-seeker cannot dodge it. Wherever an election occurs, there this question will arise. Wherever men come together to speak of public affairs, there again will it be. No political Joshua now, with miraculous power, can stop the sun in Ids course through the heavens. It is even now rejoicing, like a strong man, to run its race, and will yet send its beams into the most distant plant- ations — aye, sir, and melt the chains of every slave. But this movement — or agitation, as it is reproachfully called — is boldly pro- nounced injurious to the very object desired. Now, without entering into de- tails which neither time nor the occasion justifies, let me say that this objection be- longs to those conmionplaces, which have been arrayed against every beneficent movement in the world's history — ag;iinst even knowledge itself — against the aboli- tion of the slave trade. Perh;tj>s it was not unnatural ior the Senator from North Carolina [Mr. Badger] to press it, even as vehemently as he did ; but it sounded less natural when it came, though in more moderate phrase, from my distinguished friend and colleague from Massachusetts, [Mr. EvKRETT.] Tlie past furnishes a controlling exnmple by wliich its true char- acter may be determined. Do not forget, sir, that the efforts of William Wilberforce encountered this precise objection, and that the condition of the kidnapped slave was then vindicated, in language not un- like that of the Senator from North Caro- lina, by no less a person than the Duke of Clarence, of the royal family of Great Britain. In what was called his maiden speech, on INIay 3d, 1792, and preserved in the Parliamentary Debates, he said: " The negroes were not treated in the manner which had so much agitated the public mind. lie had been an attentive observer of their state, and had no doubt that he could brinf forward proofs to con- vince their lordships that their state was far from being miserable ; on the contrary, that when the various ranks of society were considered, they were comparatively in a state of luuuble happiness." And only the next year this same royal prince, in debate in the House of Lords, asserted that the promoters of the abolition of the slave trade were " either fanatics or hypo- crites," and in one of these classes he de- clared that he ranked Wilberforce. jNIark now the end. After years of weary effort, the slave trade was finally abolished ; and at last, in 1833, the early vindicator of even this enormity, the maligner of a name hallowed among men, was brought to give his royal assent, as William IV, King of Great Britain, to the immortal act of Par- liament, greater far than any victory of war, by which slavery was abolished throughout the British dominions. Sir, tune and the universal con-;cience have vindicated the labors of Wilberforce.- The movement against American slavery, aus- picated by the august names of Washing- ton, Franklin, and Jefferson, can calmly await a similar judgment. But it is suggested that, in this move- ment, there is danger to the Union. In this solicitude I cannot share. As a lover of concord and a jealous partisan of all things that make for peace, I am always glad to express my attachment to the Union ; but I believe that this bond will be most truly preserved and most benefi- cently extended (for I shriidc from no ex- pansion where Freedom leads the way) by lirndy upholding those princi])les of Lib- erty and Justice which were made its e;'.rly corner-stones. The true danger to this Union proceeds, not from any abandon- ment of the " peculiar institution " of the South, but from the abandonment of the spirit in which the Union was formed ; not from any warfare, within the limits of the Constitution, upon Slavery; but from warfare, like that waged by this very bill, upon Freedom. The Union is most pre- cious; but more precious far are that SPEECH OF CHARLES SUMNER. " general welfare," " domestic tranquil- lity," and those "blessings of Libert}-," 23 which it was established to secure ; all which are now wantonly endangered. Not that I love the Union less, but Free- dom more, do I now, in pleading this great cause, insist that Freedom, at all hazards, shall be preserved. One word more, and I have done. The great master, Shakspeare, who, with all- seeing mortal eye, observed mankind, and with immortal pen depicted the manners as they rise, has presented a scene which may be read with advantage by all who would plunge the South into tempestuous quarrel with the North. I refer to the well-known dialogue between Brutus and Cassius. Reading this remarkable pas- sage, it is difficult not to see in Brutus our own North, and in Cassius the South : Cas. Urge me no more, I shall forget myself; Have miad upon your health, tempt me no further. Bru. Hear me, for I -will speak. Must I give way and room to your rush choler? Can. ye gods ! ye gods ! " Must I endure all this? Bru. All this? ay, more: Fret, till your proud heart break: Go, show your slaves how choleric you are. And make your bondmen tremble. Must I budge? Must I observe you? Must ytand and croucTi Under your testy humor? % ^ ^/•<. Do not presume too much upon my love I may do that I shiill be sorry for. Bru. You have done that you should be sorry for. There is no terror, Cassius, -in your threats; For I am arm'd so strong in honesty, That they jiass by me, as the idle wind, Which I respect not. Cas. A friend should bear his friend's infirmi- ties. But Brutus makes mine greater than they are. Bru. I do not, TILL YOU PRACTICE THEM ON ME. Ctis. You love me not, Bru. I do not like your faults. Julius Ccasar, Acl 4, sce?ie 3. And the colloquy proceeding, each finally comes to understand the other, appreciates his character and attitude, and the impet- uous gallant Cassius exclaims, "Give me your hand;" to which Brutus replies, "And my heart too." Afterwards, with hand and heart united, on the field of Philippi they together upheld the liberties of Rome The North and the South, sir, as I fond- ly trust, amidst all differences, will ever have a hand and heart for each other ; and, believing in the sure prevalence of Al- mighty Truth, I confidently look forward to the good time, when both will unite, according to the sentiments of the Fathers and the true spirit of the Constitution, in declaring Freedom and not Slavery nation- al, to the end that the Flag of the Repub- lic, wherever it floats, on sea or land, with- in the na/2on«/ jurisdiction, may not cover a single slave. Then will be achieved that Union, contemplated at the beginning, against which the storms of faction and the assaults of foreign power shall beat in vain, as upon the Rock of Ages ; and LIBERTY, seeking a firm foothold, will HAVE AT LAST WHEREON TO STAND AND MOVE THE WORLD. EUBLL A BLANCHARD, PUI.NTEIIS, WAfcjHI.NGTON, D. G. >